New York Times: SciFi Channel to become - Syfy?

[ScifigirlSG]

Just another reason to get rid of cable....I had it for the you-know-what channel. I have to figure out how to hook up a/v cables from my computer to my tv so I can watch hulu tv on a bigger screen.

[VSS]

Just another reason to get rid of cable....I had it for the you-know-what channel. I have to figure out how to hook up a/v cables from my computer to my tv so I can watch hulu tv on a bigger screen.

Most of the networks have their own videos as well and you can get them there a little faster than hulu, if you know what you want. I don't have to stay up late to watch Craig Ferguson anymore, either.

[Angela V]

It's the tag line that really gets to me and I can't even get this station!

[jenks]

One of the things that bugs me about the network PTB is their emphasis on a younger demographic which they think will bring them in more ad dollars. So it's about the cash, is it? Then someone please explain to me why these people are targeting not only a group younger than me, a life long loyal fan of the genre, but one that has less money than me. Have they ever been to a sci-fi convention? Who do they think is buy all of those tickets? And at Gatcon, I saw few of their targeted demographic writing out the nice large checks for those RDA line drawings. Who do they think is going to have the disposable cash to buy the stuff they are advertising?

Why would they care? The channel is paid by the advertisers, they pay more for the younger demographics because despite what you say, they do spend more, but even if they didn't that would be the advertisers problem, not Sci Fi's. And I'm not sure why you're using a convention as an example, the majority of Sci Fi's audience probably wouldn't want to be seen dead at one.

[Briangate78]

This name change is not bothering me, it is the constant bickering and it;s making my job a living hell, lol. GW is not the only forum that has people upset.

[Skydiver]

iirc, hulu is owned by nbc, that also owns scifi

one reason they're probably rebranding is to open up the library of bravo and usa and nbc and a couple of other networks i think and share across them.

[VSS]

Morjana posted an ad from MGM's website touting SG-1 and hulu over on another thread. So I hope it is MGM's idea to bypass Skiffy, and I hope they do it with the next SG-1 movie, too. It seems that whenever Skiffy gets overly involved, things don't tend to work out so well. That's why I'm pessimistic about SGU.

[morjana]

Morjana posted an ad from MGM's website touting SG-1 and hulu over on another thread. So I hope it is MGM's idea to bypass Skiffy, and I hope they do it with the next SG-1 movie, too. It seems that whenever Skiffy gets overly involved, things don't tend to work out so well. That's why I'm pessimistic about SGU.

HULU is owned by NBC/Universal -- and SciFi Channel (or Syfy) is also part of NBC/Universal.

MGM so far with their Stargate property is married to the SciFi Channel -- or Syfy -- for now.

[prion]

This name change is not bothering me, it is the constant bickering and it;s making my job a living hell, lol. GW is not the only forum that has people upset.

Bickering entails a back and forth process. People just aren't happy with Skiffy's new agenda of broadening the channel into, well, just a regular network. It will no longer be a channel that be devoted to science fiction. And since the press is ripping it apart, it's not just fans.

I mean, it won't be any differnet than any other channel now. It's lost the genre appeal.

The twitter community just won't stop tweeting about it. It's so much fun to watch. however, now there are more foreign tweets, so I'm gonna have to decipher those. Judging by !s in 'em, not happy campers.

[Skydiver]

right now, i'm sure it's still profitable for mgm to partner with the Universal group of networks.

when it's not, they'll take their stuff elsewhere.

but also, mgm isn't just dealing with stargate, they're also dealing with the other shows and movies they put out. Universal offers several networks for mgm's stuff to air on

with these huge companies owning so many different networks/magazines, etc, you end up with a LOT of 'looks to be different but is all really teh same company touting the same thing'

such as people magazine and nbc, especially the today show. People and NBC are joined, thus one promotes the other. Most people don't realize that the two different medias are owned by the same company.

[prion]

Oh, it's too easy to find these gems...

From Twitter…
QuinnWageman: Colbert on Sci Fi changing to Syfy: tinyurl.com/cur5xg @ 12:15. Hilarious!


Alas, can't watch YouTube now but if anybody can watch and report back

[Hatusu]

http://www.comedycentral.com/colbert...isodeId=222059

LOL. "The war against the soft C" and "replacing Battlestar Gallastisa".

[Flyboy]

Pretty much because of the name. Folks have ignored my posts, which is fine. They have been all about this formula for years. We are still getting Stargate and BSG franchise shows, and well we still have shows like Sanctuary and Eureka which I enjoy a lot. Nothing has changed about the programming, just their name.

I'm not so much outraged, and what you're saying is true, I think the 'quality' of Skiffy will remain, there will continue to be shows loved and hated, and you're right about the mixed bag of content.

I think there's two problems.

1) Some of the discussion about content should have come before the name change. Ie the kids stuff.

2) The name and slogan are both ridiculous. I mean seriously, I'm not so much digusted as I find it laughable. If they wanted a totally new name to reflect a wider array of programming, fine... but SyFy? And... 'Imagine Greater'? Couldn't they just go for 'Skiffy'?

[prion]

I'm not so much outraged, and what you're saying is true, I think the 'quality' of Skiffy will remain, there will continue to be shows loved and hated, and you're right about the mixed bag of content.

I think there's two problems.

1) Some of the discussion about content should have come before the name change. Ie the kids stuff.

2) The name and slogan are both ridiculous. I mean seriously, I'm not so much digusted as I find it laughable. If they wanted a totally new name to reflect a wider array of programming, fine... but SyFy? And... 'Imagine Greater'? Couldn't they just go for 'Skiffy'?

Ooh, yeah, they should have gone with Skiffy, but then people might confuse it with Jiffy the peanut butter....

I think it won't matter too much as SG and BSG are the shows most people watched, and when they're totally gone, the viewers will just go elsewhere. Ghosthunter fans will probably be the biggest batch left.

[Flyboy]

Ooh, yeah, they should have gone with Skiffy, but then people might confuse it with Jiffy the peanut butter....

I think it won't matter too much as SG and BSG are the shows most people watched, and when they're totally gone, the viewers will just go elsewhere. Ghosthunter fans will probably be the biggest batch left.

As Briangate said though, Caprica will be aired, and that will retain the BSG viewers. Stargate Universe will retain shall we say at least half of the Stargate fans, and will inevitably introduce new fans as SGA did, including possibly, the BSG only fans in that they're given a new dark ship based drama, even if it's not a BSG clone. There's also Dollhouse which seems to be gathering a following, as well as Doctor Who and Sanctuary - both very popular shows. So I doubt it'll JUST be the Ghosthunter fans... additionally, if they expand their programming further and produce more Tin Man esque shows then they'll probably grab a lot of viewers that way.

It's just a shame they have such a bloody stupid name.